Federationism and post-Federationism

The Federation system was built on the basis of a fairly simple set of ideas. There were always differences in emphasis, and genuine disagreements over principles. Two Jews, three opinions, as the saying goes. But the basic principles were not complicated. The fundamental basis was the responsibility of Jews to help and support other Jews. From there, the other principles followed naturally (1) that a centralized communal organization was needed. Since religious matters are typically a source of disagreement among Jews, the communal organization (2) must be largely secular. (3) The Federation system was focused on basic needs, such as health care, food, housing, basic income, and especially safety. Federationism thus had a great deal in common with the so-called “pragmatic Zionism” of Herzl, and it adopted the Zionist insight that safety would depend on organized mass emigration to a Jewish state. This would also, clearly, demand support for Israel, and it would also imply fighting antisemitism.

Post–Federationism

In the year 2016, a great deal has changed. Israel and Diaspora Jewry are no longer communities of destitute immigrants. Today’s impoverished Jews depend less on Jewish charities, because there is more government support available for them. In line with this, I would argue that there has been a rethinking of basic principles, in the direction what can be called post-Federationism.

Post-Federationist Judaism is organized to help both Jews and non-Jews, returning towards the notion of a “light unto the nations.” A community constituted by mutual aid has become instead a community that is increasingly organized around Tikkun Olam. If UJA was the classic institution of Federation, the AJWS is a classic example of post-Federationism. Other characteristics of post-Federationism are:

From centralized institutions to a freer structure: Federations today allow a freer structure of competing institutions and personal funding decisions by individual donors. The new structure therefore has a less defined center.

From secular to trans-denominational: The trans-denominational principle means that Jewish debate defines the new structure more than unanimity and consensus.

From refugee assistance to Jewish flourishing: Post-Federationism focuses more on cultural and spiritual needs than Federationism did, less on physical needs, and far less on migration and aliyah.

From raising money to raising voices: Federationism always supported a program of activism in the Diaspora, for example, during the Soviet Jewry movement. By contrast, it did not support grassroots organizing within Israeli society. Post-Federationism changes this and does support efforts to shape Israeli public opinion and Israeli policy, in order to help the neediest elements of Israeli society.

Changing attitudes to the non-Jewish world: Post-Federationism tends to see non-Jews in a more positive light. For example, one sees a shift in discussions of the Holocaust from studying the Nazis to studying rescuers and strategies of genocide prevention.

Changing notions of Jewish identity: Moving away from an understanding of Jewish identity as exclusive, the organized Jewish community today has moved towards an inclusive notion of Jewish identity, from “Jewish and not …” to “Jewish and …”

While we may be in an age of post-Federationism, “Federationism” has not disappeared, nor should it. Communities tend to look for the middle way. The modern Jewish community was never so xenophobic that it regarded all strangers as foes, and is unlikely ever to be so xenophilic that it helps only strangers, and recognizes no enemies. Similarly, the other principles are not “all or nothing.”

But there has been a shift in emphasis. Jewish agencies that formerly helped Jews have expanded their efforts to help non-Jews. HIAS is one example among many. The Jewish Agency (JAFI) is no longer the major recipient of American Jewish fundraising, and Federations now channel funding to synagogues, Chabad and Jewish religious day schools. The prevalence of Jewish intermarriage has forced a reconsideration of the meaning of Jewish identity.

The future of the American Jewish community is unclear, and I am no prophet; but it is clear where we have gotten. Among the most striking changes of the last generation has been the decline of the centralized institutions of the American Jewish community, and their transformation from a system of Jewish self-help, focused on basic needs, to a new system that is adjusting slowly to a new paradigm.

Joseph M. Davis is an associate professor of Jewish thought at Gratz College in Philadelphia.

Reader Interactions

Comments

Fascinating post !
So, in light of these political, financial, social and cultural shifts and evolutionary changes ( whether one agrees with them or not), what are the implications?what will the federation as an institution and as a “system” look like in a decade from now ? How will these changes impact upon its current and future viability, impact, structure, capacity and reason for being? What role will they play in response to the evolving unmet needs of our community on the local, regional, national and international levels.
These are but a few of the questions and meta challenges raised by this post….and, which beg for strategic and visionary leadership responses.
Let the conversation begin…..

Well said, but there is much more to the notion posited by Mr. Davis. Having worked in the Federation world for 27 years, almost during this entire tenure I wondered what our relevancy was as an organization? My role as a professional and relationship to all Federation stakeholders was never clearly defined, was confusing and challenged frequently as we tried to lead. And, could we survive the challenges and bottlenecks we faced daily from the blurred agendas put forward by leadership as we tried to do what we had hoped to, create a real sense of community and put the Federation forward as the central address for the communities we served. Not sure we succeeded and certainly today, as this post suggests, we live in a very different world today.

Great article and a great reply . As someone who is only one week into a new role as the CEO of a major Jewish Federation in Atlanta, Georgia who took on this position with all that Joseph brings to light, I am determined to continue this conversation and envision a new future.

What’s important to remember is we have a strong history, tremendous leadership and commitment and thought leaders determined to figure this out. We have the infrastructure and we are positioned within the community to foster collaboration , innovation and convening the community to envision a new future together. It will require letting go of a lot of what we and others perceive ourselves to be, but we must hold on to what is sacred and what is so incredible about the heritage that we share . For those of us ready to dive in with creativity and imagination, it could be the beginning of the most exciting time for Jewish Federations and for the Jewish people. I know that’s what we are aiming for in Atlanta . Thank you Professor Davis and Dr. Botwinck.

Yes, but. Prof. Davis touches on many of the factors at play but misses others:
1. As hamburgers were to McDonalds Federation’s glory years were linked to the UJA juggernaut and Israel and overseas needs. Within the culture of federations it has been eclipsed by a psychologically centered “continuity industrial comp!ex” whose donor appeal is not as overwhelming as its proponents asert.
2. The rise of foundations has shifted and privatised the major donor conversation away from the board rooms of Federation.
3. Internally, Federations have changed their ground game centering activities around professionals as fundraisers rather than strong and powerful lay networks.
However, as we are seeing in the political sphere, American life is shifting from me-centered organizing to movement centered approaches. In such an environment federations will be forced to increase the participation of the many in decision making and find those world changing purposes that can compete for the hearts and minds of the Jewish public. Some things change but ultimately our desire to be part of something bigger than ourselves survives.

If we accept the following as true: “A community constituted by mutual aid has become instead a community that is increasingly organized around Tikkun Olam. If UJA was the classic institution of Federation, the AJWS is a classic example of post-Federationism.” then it bears closer examination as to why AJWS is a successful enterprise, especially in garnering the involvement of a younger cohort, for whom service to the world is a compelling mission.

What Professor Davis alludes to, is that there has been a watering-down of a previously crystal clear purpose. What the rest of the established Jewish organizations, Federation included, have to do, is to find an equally captivating message to involve those who may be brought into the mission. There are many who stand on the periphery, having been ‘turned off’ to traditional means of Jewish expression, but willing to engage again. It’s been demonstrated in many research studies over and over again, that there is power in experiences that promote service, leadership and learning. Why not start there?

Primary Sidebar

Join The Conversation

What's the best way to follow important issues affecting the Jewish philanthropic world?
Our Daily Update keeps you on top of the latest news, trends and opinions shaping the landscape, providing an invaluable source for inspiration and learning.